The fractures within the transatlantic alliance are showing up in operational decisions: closed airspace, denied base access, and refused requests.

MADRID, April 3 (Xinhua) -- Five weeks into U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, the fractures within the transatlantic alliance are no longer a matter of diplomatic friction. They are showing up in operational decisions: closed airspace, denied base access, and refused requests.

The pattern is striking: European countries have not automatically followed the United States into this war.

DIFFERENT METHODS, SAME REFUSAL

Spain has been the most direct. Madrid closed its airspace to U.S. military aircraft involved in operations against Iran and denied authorization for the use of bases at Rota and Moron de la Frontera. The restrictions apply to conflict-related operations only.

Spanish Defense Minister Margarita Robles told parliament that the United States and Israel "cannot be the ones who decide what rules apply in the world." She described the military campaign against Iran as falling outside international law. "We cannot accept that two countries have decided to drag the world into their war," she said.

Italy drew its line through procedure. Rome blocked the U.S. use of the Sigonella air base in Sicily after discovering that U.S. bombers had filed a flight plan only after the aircraft were already airborne -- without prior notification or authorization. Italian authorities determined the flights fell outside the scope of existing bilateral agreements. The government stated that activities linked to the Iran conflict require explicit parliamentary authorization.

France has set firm limits on the cooperation it will allow. Paris confirmed it had not changed its overflight policy in response to U.S. President Donald Trump's accusation that France was being "very unhelpful." Certain U.S. aircraft may use French military bases, but only on condition that they play no role in operations against Iran. President Emmanuel Macron stated the military strikes on Iran were conducted "outside international law" and could not be endorsed by France.

In Portugal, domestic pressure has sparked a debate. Criticism has mounted over the reported use of the Lajes Air Base in the Azores for Iran-related operations, with opposition parties questioning whether proper authorization was granted under the Portugal-U.S. Defense Cooperation Agreement. More than 8,000 people have signed a petition calling for the base to be barred from such use.

PRICE OF UNILATERALISM

The breadth of European refusals points to something more fundamental than mere disagreement over a single conflict.

Washington launched its military campaign against Iran without consulting North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies, without a United Nations Security Council mandate, and in the face of explicit objections from governments across the European continent. It then demanded the use of bases and airspace that those governments had not agreed to make available for offensive operations -- doing so without prior notification at all.

"One key issue for European countries is the issue of legality," said Kamil Zwolski, a fellow on terrorism and conflict studies at the Royal United Services Institute, Britain's leading defense and security think tank. "What Europeans mean when they say that this war has no legal basis is that the United Nations has not approved it -- there was no resolution. They also mean that this is not a war of self-defense, because there was no evidence of imminent attack of Iran against the U.S. or Israel."

"At the minimum, what they also mean is that this war was not agreed by NATO allies. They were not consulted," Zwolski told CNN.

The consequences have extended beyond the political aspect. Brent Crude surged after the strikes began, and European energy markets have been rattled by the risk of disruption to supplies transiting the Strait of Hormuz -- a route that handled roughly one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade before the military campaign against Iran began. The economic fallout from a conflict Europe had no hand in starting is being felt by European households and industries.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz was vocal. "The question is not whether we will participate. We will not do so." On NATO, he added: "It is a defensive alliance, not an interventionist alliance."

A ONE-WAY ALLIANCE?

In response to the European attitudes, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the United States would "have to re-examine" its relationship with NATO after allies declined to support operations against Iran.

According to an interview published by Britain's Daily Telegraph on Wednesday, Trump is "seriously considering" withdrawing the United States from NATO following those refusals.

For his part, during a visit to Japan, Macron said Europe offers "predictability and stability," unlike "some countries" that may take decisions without informing allies and risk harming them -- remarks widely interpreted by media as referring to the United States. His comments brought into focus European concerns over consultation, predictability, and the decision-making process within the alliance.

Statements from the European and U.S. sides reflect a growing divergence in expectations over how decisions are made and how support is defined. The war brought such divergence into a clearer view. A gap is emerging between Washington's expectation of support and Europe's emphasis on strategic calculation.

No European government is seeking to leave NATO yet. However, European countries are no longer moving in lockstep with the United States, and are increasingly making their own decisions on involvement in military operations.